there arise

[Gabriel Malheiros]

Hello, everyone

In the Bible, in Deuteronomy 13:1 more specifically, there is this versicle:

"If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder..."

Why is there a "there" before arise"? And why not "arises"?

Couldn't it be " If arises among you a prophet..."?

Thank you!!

 

[PaulQ]

The English is 16th Century English.
There is a dummy subject.
Arise is the subjunctive
Couldn't it be " If arises among you a prophet..."? No. No it could not.
But it could be "If a prophet arises from amongst you...". This is Modern English.

 

[The Newt]

The idea is "if a prophet arises..." The use of "arise" is probably an obsolete subjunctive, and the "there" is likewise an antiquated constriction that we generally wouldn't use today, although we sometimes say things like "if there should happen to be an emergency..."

 

[Gabriel Malheiros]

The idea is "if a prophet arises..." The use of "arise" is probably an obsolete subjunctive, and the "there" is likewise an antiquated constriction that we generally wouldn't use today, although we sometimes say things like "if there should happen to be an emergency..."

Can I replace this there with it? "If it should happen to be an emergency"?

 

[Gabriel Malheiros]

The English is 16th Century English.
There is a dummy subject.
Arise is the subjunctive
Couldn't it be " If arises among you a prophet..."? No. No it could not.
But it could be "If a prophet arises from amongst you...". This is Modern English.

PaulQ, can'I invert sentences in English. Do you remember I was reading Dracula? So, I found several sentences like the followingin the book:

"Beyond the green swelling hills of the Mittel Land rose mighty slopes of forest up to lofty steeps of the Carpathians themselves"

Isn't this sentence inverted? The direct order is: "Beyond the green swelling hills of the Land mighty slopes of forest rose up to lofty steeps of the Carpathians themselves."

The author inverted the order and didn't add "there". Why?

Thank you for all.

 

[PaulQ]

PaulQ, can I invert sentences in English.

Yes.

I found several sentences like the following in the book:

"Beyond the green swelling hills of the Mittel Land, rose mighty slopes of forest up to lofty steeps of the Carpathians themselves"

Isn't this sentence inverted?

Yes.

The direct order is: "Beyond the green swelling hills of the Land mighty slopes of forest rose up to lofty steeps of the Carpathians themselves."

Yes.

The author inverted the order and didn't add "there". Why?

Why not? It his style. Bran Stoker was writing 300 years after the King James Version of the Bible was written. - language changes.

I don't know what 16th century Portuguese was like, but I should imagine it differs in style from today's Portuguese.

 

[Gabriel Malheiros]

Yes.
Yes.
Yes.

Why not? It his style. Bran Stoker was writing 300 years after the King James Version of the Bible was written. - language changes.

I don't know what 16th century Portuguese was like, but I should imagine it differs in style from today's Portuguese.

I understand that languages change. But what I am confused about is why in the sentence of the Bible it is wrong to take "there" out and keep the sentence inverted, since there are examples of inverted sentences with no the dummy there, like the one in Dracula.

 

[Glenfarclas]

Yes.

The comma you've added in red is neither necessary nor desirable.

But what I am confused about is why in the sentence of the Bible it is wrong to take "there" out and keep the sentence inverted, since there are examples of inverted sentences with no the dummy there, like the one in Dracula.

Different words and very different structures.

 

[The Newt]

Can I replace this there with it? "If it should happen to be an emergency"?

No. "It" would refer to some specific previously mentioned situation, which is not the case here.

 

[Gabriel Malheiros]

The comma you've added in red is neither necessary nor desirable.



Different words and very different structures.

But could I add the "there" in the Bram Stoker's sentence? --> Beyond the green swelling hills of the Mittel Land there rose mighty slopes...

 

[PaulQ]

Are you aware what ergative verbs are? The construction "There <ergative verb> object." is archaic - it is no longer used. It was a fixed construction. The "there" cannot be removed as it is the subject.

"If there .....arises ...among you....... a prophet..."
if <subject> .verb ...adverbial phrase ...object."

It was a way of making an otherwise intransitive verb transitive: "There came a man from the west."

 

[Keith Bradford]

Gabriel, it may be amusing to rewrite classics, but it doesn't do much good to ask why the original authors didn't write them that way. You might as well ask why they wore doublet and hose or top hats. That's the way they did it in those days - we usually don't.

But we can certainly say that "If arise among you a prophet... " doesn't work and it never has. I don't think it's ever been possible to follow if directly with a finite verb.

 

[Gabriel Malheiros]

Are you aware what ergative verbs are? The construction "There <ergative verb> object." is archaic - it is no longer used. It was a fixed construction. The "there" cannot be removed as it is the subject.

"If there .....arises ...among you....... a prophet..."
if <subject> .verb ...adverbial phrase ...object."

PaulQ, that I understood now. Thank you.
But I can't tell the difference between the two sentences, and why, if Bram Stoker inverted the sentence, he didn't add "there" to be the subject.

"If there arise among you a prophet" -- > If a prophet arises among you ( Subject + Verb)

"Rose mighty slopes of forest" --> "Slopes of forest rose" (Subject + Verb)


As you said, there is a way of making intransitive verbs transitive. Rise is instranstive. If Bram Stoker made it transiive, shouldn't he have add "there"?


But anyway, I will keep reading and pay more attention to the sentences like that.

Thank you for all once again, PaulQ

 

[Glenfarclas]

But I can't tell the difference between the two sentences, and why, if Bram Stoker inverted the sentence, he didn't add "there" to be the subject.

"Rise" is a different verb from "arise." And the prepositional phrase is in a totally different place in each sentence and has a different function. Compare:

Came a severe drought.
Came a severe drought with the rising temperatures.
There came a severe drought. , but a little old-fashioned
With the rising temperatures came a severe drought. ​

 

[Gabriel Malheiros]

"Rise" is a different verb from "arise." And the prepositional phrase is in a totally different place in each sentence and has a different function. Compare:

Came a severe drought.
Came a severe drought with the rising temperatures.
There came a severe drought. , but a little old-fashioned
With the rising temperatures came a severe drought. ​

me see If I got this right

Can I say something like : We were getting tired of tromping through the mountain as in front of us/before us opened out a stunning valley?

But "We were getting tired of tromping through the mountain as there opened out a stunning valley in front of/before us"?


another one: and "with some chains over its body appeared on the floor a dog writhing in pain" ...but : there appeared on the floor a dog writhing in pain with some chains over its body"

Are those right? Did I got it right or not?

 

[The Newt]

me see If I got this right

Can I say something like : We were getting tired of tromping through the mountain as in front of us/before us opened out a stunning valley?

But "We were getting tired of tromping through the mountain as there opened out a stunning valley in front of/before us"?

another one: and "with some chains over its body appeared on the floor a dog writhing in pain" ...but : there appeared on the floor a dog writhing in pain with some chains over its body"

Are those right? Did I got it right or not?

With the two sentences beginning "we were getting tired" the time-logic is not quite right. You could say "just as we were getting tired of tromping through the mountains a stunning valley opened out before us." You could also say "... there opened out before us a stunning valley," although it sounds a bit dated or corny that way.

"With some chains over its body appeared on the floor a dog writhing in pain" doesn't work. You could say "there appeared on the floor a dog writhing in pain with some chains wrapped around its body." Again, it sounds a bit dated.

 

[PaulQ]

The English is a little shaky, but I think you have the principle.

We were getting tired of tromping through the mountains when in front of us opened out a stunning valley.

But "We were getting tired of tromping through the mountains when there opened out a stunning valley in front of us".

(Edit to remove question marks 16:10GMT 25/03)

 

[Gabriel Malheiros]

With the two sentences beginning "we were getting tired" the time-logic is not quite right. You could say "just as we were getting tired of tromping through the mountains a stunning valley opened out before us." You could also say "... there opened out before us a stunning valley," although it sounds a bit dated or corny that way.

"With some chains over its body appeared on the floor a dog writhing in pain" doesn't work. You could say "there appeared on the floor a dog writhing in pain with some chains wrapped around its body." Again, it sounds a bit dated.

I got why the second one is wrong. But I don't understand why the first one is wrong : as we were getting tired of tromping through the mountains in front of us opened out a stunning valley..../ or we were getting tired of tromping through the mountain as opened out before us a stunning valley... Why are those wrong?


Thank you so much, The Newt

 

[Gabriel Malheiros]

The English is a little shaky, but I think you have the principle.

We were getting tired of tromping through the mountains when in front of us opened out a stunning valley?

But "We were getting tired of tromping through the mountains when there opened out a stunning valley in front of us"?

Why is it a little shaky?

Why are those wrong?

as we were getting tired of tromping through the mountains in front of us opened out a stunning valley..../
or
we were getting tired of tromping through the mountain as(when) opened out before us a stunning valley...

 

[PaulQ]

Why is it a little shaky?

Compare your version with mine.

 

[Gabriel Malheiros]

Compare your version with mine.

But you just replaced "as" with "when", isn't that right? And The Newt said there was a problem with "there" and "time-logic", but I can't see that problem.

Look:

My first sentence:

"We were getting tired of tromping through the mountain as in front of us/before us opened out a stunning valley.

Yours:

"We were getting tired of tromping through the mountains when in front of us opened out a stunning valley."


My second one:

"We were getting tired of tromping through the mountain as there opened out a stunning valley in front of/before us"

Yours:

"We were getting tired of tromping through the mountain when there opened out a stunning valley in front of us"


I know your sentence is far better than mine, and in no way am I taking issue with it. What I don't understand is why it is wrong to omit "there" in my first sentence. You left the "there"out too, so I figure it is correct to omit it. And now I am confused. Was my error related to "as/when" or "there"?

Thank you, PaulQ

 

[PaulQ]

But you just replaced "as" with "when", isn't that right?

In yours "as" sounds as if it means "because". That is probably what The Newt meant.

 

[Gabriel Malheiros]

In yours "as" sounds as if it means "because". That is probably what The Newt meant.

I understood that. But in relation to my first sentence "

"We were getting tired of tromping through the mountain as in front of us opened out a stunning valley", he said : "You could say "just as we were getting tired of tromping through the mountains a stunning valley opened out before us." You could also say "... there opened out before us a stunning valley,"

I know his suggestions are far better than my original sentence (And I thank you for the suggestions, The Newt)... But did you notice he put the sentence back in the direct order in his first suggestion and then , in his seccond suggestion, he kept the sentence inverted, but added a "there" . That's why I am confused, because I was thinking my first sentence was right without "there":

"We were getting tired of tromping through the mountain when(correcting) in front of us opened out a stunning valley"

 

[Gabriel Malheiros]

In yours "as" sounds as if it means "because". That is probably what The Newt meant.

Did you understand I am confused about, PaulQ?

Thank you for all!

 

[PaulQ]

Let us start again:

Consider:

A man ...............came ....................from London to mend my car. = ......There .......................came................ a man from London to mend my car.
Subject...intransitive verb...............................................................= Dummy Subject.... verb used transitively ...object.

 

[Gabriel Malheiros]

Let us start again:

Consider:

A man ...............came ....................from London to mend my car. = ......There .......................came................ a man from London to mend my car.
Subject...intransitive verb...............................................................= Dummy Subject.... verb used transitively ...object.

This I got it, but I don't understand why my sentence "We were getting tired of tromping through the mountain when(correcting) in front of/before us opened out a stunning valley"" is wrong... Why should it be " We were getting tired of tromping through the mountain when(correcting) there opened out in front of/before us a stunning valley"?

There is a sentence (I don't know whether it is a saying) that goes: Before us lies the open road.

This sentence was inverted and there is no there. I read you can invert sentences without adding the dummy there when there is prepositions like before , in front of, or adverb clauses before the subject.

In my sentence, there is "before us" (before us opened out a stunning valley). I dont't know why I have to add there. Do you understand?

Thank you, PaulQ

 

[PaulQ]

This is becoming difficult to follow.

In which post did you write "We were getting tired of tromping through the mountain when(correcting) in front of/before us opened out a stunning valley"?

 

[Gabriel Malheiros]

This is becoming difficult to follow.

In which post did you write "We were getting tired of tromping through the mountain when(correcting) in front of/before us opened out a stunning valley"?

Post 15. i wrote "as in front of us", that's why I put "correcting" after "when"... But I wrote "in front of us opened out a stunning valley".... And I don't understand why it's wrong. Why should I add "there"?

 

[PaulQ]

I can't see that anyone actually said it was wrong...

 

[Gabriel Malheiros]

I can't see that anyone actually said it was wrong...

The Newt said(post 16): " You could say: " just as we were getting tired of tromping through the mountains a stunning valley opened out before us." (He changed the sentence back into disrect order) ...You could also say "... there opened out before us a stunning valley,"(He added there) .... So I supposed my sentence was wrong.

 

[PaulQ]

Then you misunderstood: He said "You could say: "[...]"" which means "an alternative is "[...]""

 

[Gabriel Malheiros]

Then you misunderstood: He said "You could say: "[...]"" which means "an alternative is "[...]""

I thought my inverted sentence was wrong without "there", so he gave me two alternatives: or changing the sentence back to the direct form, or adding there. But I think I got it now. The theee are correct, and he just gave me two alternatives.

thank you, PaulQ

 

[Gabriel Malheiros]

With the two sentences beginning "we were getting tired" the time-logic is not quite right. You could say "just as we were getting tired of tromping through the mountains a stunning valley opened out before us." You could also say "... there opened out before us a stunning valley," although it sounds a bit dated or corny that way.

"With some chains over its body appeared on the floor a dog writhing in pain" doesn't work. You could say "there appeared on the floor a dog writhing in pain with some chains wrapped around its body." Again, it sounds a bit dated.

What do you mean by "time-logic is not quite correct", The Newt?

 

[The Newt]

What do you mean by "time-logic is not quite correct", The Newt?

The problem was here: "We were getting tired of tromping through the mountain as in front of us/before us opened out a stunning valley?" If you substitute "when" for "as" (as suggested above), then it's not a problem, or you can start the sentence with "just as we were getting tired..." as I suggested.